Main menu

Post navigation

“Baby Cuddlers” Ploy for Agency to Collect More Money

The Internet was taken by storm with multiple articles calling for “baby cuddler volunteers” just a few days ago. People all over the country shared, posted, commented and were tricked into thinking there were SO many children in need of cuddling and care while they waiting for their “forever” homes. I gave my thoughts on this in my previous post, “Cuddle, Nurture, Newborns Awaiting Adoption: The Adoption Propaganda Machine.”

Turns out, if you had several of the slightly different articles, all containing different bits of information, the agency behind the article, Spence-Chapin, only needed 5-10 volunteers, as AOL.com published as a direct statement from Spence-Chapin. This is a very important fact to keep in mind while forming your opinions about this matter. You must think about this logically. If an agency is only in need to 5-10 volunteers, why put out a national smoke signal? Why is this article being published, posted, and run on several national news outlets, as well as smaller local ones? Why does anyone go national with any kind of news? To gain attention.

As I pointed out, in my previous article, this whole thing is just another part of the adoption propaganda machine. Turns out it is, most likely, even deeper than that. Within days of this article, and it’s different variations, going viral, Spence-Chapin made a statement on their Facebook page.

“We are filled with gratitude for the outpouring of responses we’ve received from people around the country and the world interested in volunteering in our Interim Care Program. We appreciate your support and your interest in caring for babies in need.
The best way to help a newborn is to make a donation to help us cover the expenses of each baby in interim care. The Interim Care Program is 100% funded by donor support!http://ow.ly/YxnzC”

As you’ll see, the link they provided at the end of their statement will bring you directly to their website to donate money to them. Mission accomplished. An article, citing their agency, with a gushy, gooey, feel good story (who WOULDN’T want to cuddle newborns in their spare time) went viral and now they put out the call for money. Cash, please!

As I also pointed out, in my previous article, 5 board members from this agency bring in almost $700,000 annually in salaries with the highest salary being paid to the Executive Director, Emily Forhman (an adoptive mom, I’d like to point out), in the amount of $200,000. But, pull out your checkbooks folks! The BEST way you can help these poor, innocent, orphaned, babies is to give us money. Ahem.

Actually, the BEST way you can help any child, whose parents are so desperate they are willing to suffer a lifelong wound of giving their baby up, is to pull out your checkbook and help THEIR FAMILY. Help the babies by allowing them to grow up intrinsically alike the rest of their family, which increases the chances they will feel accepted and never out of place, for even a moment. Help babies by allowing them to live their lives surrounded by people who look like them, act like them, have the same mannerisms as them. Help them to never experience the loss of their first family and navigate the rest of their life (even if in silence so as not to upset the parents – adoptive and birth alike – that made life-altering choices for them before they were even able to have a say in the matter) the issues that come with that. Help their mothers to have control over the choices made for their child, by not surrendering them, and because of that control over the outcomes of their lives. Help their parents to be there to protect them when needed and to mold the people they are becoming. Help them to not suffer this LOSS. Adoption ALWAYS begins with a LOSS. You aren’t helping babies by giving money to the industry and salaries of those who benefit, financially, from separating them.

There were a few comments on their Facebook post. The first one questioning their motives.

You can see a couple people trying to answer this question but they don’t quite have it right. Let me debunk their responses:

The money it costs to take care of them until they’re adopted? Definitely covered by the fees an agency charges for a domestic infant adoption. Typically these fees will range from $30,000 to upwards of $60,000 in agency adoptions. About those fees making it so people can’t adopt? Totally not true. People can and DO pay this amount of money for a baby. Those who don’t have it lying around will often fundraise and are usually met with a great response. People are generally happy to put out their wallets to give to someone who wants to adopt thanks to the propaganda machine that gives people a warped perception on what adoption really is. They will usually NOT happily give money to a single parent attempting to raise money to help her keep her baby. There goes that stigma again.

As for the second response. I think what this comment is saying is that the home study (research) for prospective adoptive parents cost money and then she includes medical bills for these “orphans” as well as the bills the agency incurs from being a brick and mortar business. Let’s address this, shall we?

Home studies are always paid for by the prospective adoptive parents or are included in the fee they are charged to buy adopt a baby. Medical bills, for any baby whose parents make under a certain income (and almost all women contemplating giving their baby up are low income), are covered by Medicaid. For those that this wouldn’t apply to, the adoptive parents, through their insurance company, will have all medical bills retroactively paid for from the date of birth once a placement is made with them (before finalization). As far as those gas bills, transportation, housing (not sure what housing they are talking about – maybe the babies living in volunteer foster homes?) – well, $700,000 in salaries. Need I say more?

After reading these 2 articles, that I have written, you still think that any of this was about seeking out volunteers to cuddle babies and NOT about fattening the pocket books of an agency whose assets exceed 50 million dollars, well, then, you’re either not as bright as you think you are, or you have a similar agenda that blinds you to the truth.

When it all boils down to it adoption, for agencies, facilitators, and attorneys, is about making money. Lots of it. Babies are the supply and it’s easy to capitalize on that, as any economist knows, because the demand FAR exceeds this supply.

America, I’m losing my faith in you. You have been duped. Pull your heads out from underneath the rock you have been hiding under.

And your birth mother has never been the same. It’s not only about the money these adoption agencies make, it’s the manipulation, coercion and flat out lies birth mothers suffer at the hands of the adoption industry. The vast majority of first mom’s don’t WANT to relinquish their child, they are manipulated and coerced by the adoption agency. They are told it’s the”loving thing to do” because they aren’t qualified to raise their own child. Given a little help financially, they would keep their child, and they’d be just as good of a parent as the adoptive parent in a vast majority of cases. First mom’s suffer. Adoptees are coming out in great numbers talking of the trauma of their adoption experience. So called “open adoptions” aren’t enforceable by law, and most adoptive parents do not keep their promise of an open adoption. You yourself have no idea how your own adoption was handled or how your own birth mother was coerced and manipulated at the hardest time in her life. Get educated.https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/i-adopted-my-child-birth-what-do-you-mean-trauma-alex-stavroshttp://adoptionvoicesmagazine.com/adoptee-view/adoptee-view-what-can-a-tiny-baby-know/#.Vso4YahMHMIhttp://www.exiledmothers.com/adoption_facts/mothers.html

Funny part is the articles said they had 0 volunteers “earlier this month” yet they have a picture posted from February 6th of one of their volunteers “cuddling” a newborn. The amount of holes in the story are ridiculous.